Nazeem M D Vs the State of Karnataka — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2025)

Nazeem M D Vs the State of Karnataka — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Karnataka HC (2025)

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:31129 CRL.A No. 1730 of 2024

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1730 OF 2024 (C)

BETWEEN:

NAZEEM M.D

S/O. ALEEMUDDIN @ KALEEMUDDIN, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT: VINESH DARSHAN FORM HOUSE,

NEAR HALE KEMPAIAHNAHUNDI VILLAGE, T. NARASIPURA TLAUK,

MYSURU DISTRICT-571110.

Digitally signed by SAMREEN AYUB DESHNUR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

PERMANENT RESIDENT OF:

KOCHADHAMAN TUPAMARI,

HALDIK ORA KISHANGANJ,

KHOTAPA, KATIHAR,

STATE OF BIHAR-855 105.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. LETHIF B., ADVOCATE)

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:31129 CRL.A No. 1730 of 2024

HC-KAR

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,

BY MYSURU WOMEN POLICE STATION, MYSURU DISTRICT, REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001.

KASTURI W/O. NAGARAJU,

AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT: HALEKEMPAIAHNAHUNDI VILLAGE, T. NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-571110.

PERMANENT RESIDENT OF: BEHIND ESHWAR RICE MILL,

BELONG TO J.E SHIVARAJAPPA, TEVARACHATTANAHALLI VILLAGE, SHIVAMOGGA TALUK,

SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577201.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. WAHEEDA M.M., HCGP FOR R1; SMT. VANITHA DEVI, V., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2) CR.P.C. (FILED UNDER SECTION 415(2) BNNS), PRAYING TO, SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-1 MYSURU DATED 21.11.2022 AND 22.11.2022 IN SPL.C.NO.479/2021 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 376(2)(N), 506, 323 OF IPC AND SECTION 11(III), 12, 5(I)(M), 6 OF POCSO ACT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:31129 CRL.A No. 1730 of 2024

HC-KAR

CAV JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 21.11.2022 and order on sentence dated 22.11.2022 passed in Spl.C.No.479/2021 on the file of Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I, Mysuru, wherein, the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Section 376(2)(n), 506, 323 of I.P.C under Section 11(iii) read with Section 12, 5(l)(m) read with 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.

Factual matrix of the case:

The case of the prosecution is that the victim girl is aged about 10 years as on the date of the incident. The complainant has joined a farm house, she contacted one Nagaraju who is the Manager of the said farm house. She requested the said Nagaraju to give accommodation to her family to stay in the said farm house to do coolie work. It is alleged that one month back she had joined the work and she was staying in the said farm house along with her daughter viz., Nethra and son Eranna.

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:31129 CRL.A No. 1730 of 2024

HC-KAR

It is further stated that the husband of the complainant was doing agricultural work and other works. Her son had joined the Government school at Halekempaiahnahundi. However, her daughter did not go school.

It is further stated that 10-12 members were working in the said farm house. The appellant was taking care of the horses and was staying separately in the room. On 15.09.2021, the daughter of the complainant started crying and requested the complainant to shift their place and residence to their native place. When they questioned her, she disclosed that about three days back on Monday the appellant Nazeem took her to a farm land and had committed sexual assault.

It is further stated that she was threatened not to disclose the said facts to anyone. The complainant on the following day informed the said fact to the Manager Nagaraju and informed the Police about the commission of the offence.

Based on the said complaint, the respondent – Police registered a case in Crime No.21/2021 for the offences

5 -

NC: 2025:KHC:31129 CRL.A No. 1730 of 2024

HC-KAR

stated supra . After completing the investigation submitted the charge-sheet.

To prove the case of the prosecution the prosecution examined 19 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.19 and got marked 55 documents as Ex-P.1 to P.55 and also got marked a material object as M.O.1.

The Trial Court convicted the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 376(2)(n), 506, 323 of I.P.C under Section 11(iii) read with Section 12, 5(l)(m) read with Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.

Heard learned counsel Sri. Lethif B., for appellant and Smt. Waheeda M.M., learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Smt.Vanitha Devi V., for respondent No.2.

It is the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that the Trial Court has committed error in recording the conviction. The said conviction is erroneous as it is against the evidence on record. Therefore, the same is liable to be set aside.

6 -

NC: 2025:KHC:31129 CRL.A No. 1730 of 2024

HC-KAR

It is further submitted that though, P.W.1 to 3 have turned hostile and not supported the case of the prosecution, the Trial Court committed error in recording the conviction. Based on the evidence of other witnesses which is not permissible under law.

In fact, the Trial Court has committed error in appreciating the statement of the victim which is made before the Women Police Sub-Inspector on 18.09.2021. On ignoring the evidence of the victim, the Trial Court has committed error in appreciating the evidence. Hence, the conviction is liable to be set aside.

Per Contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader, vehemently, submitted that though all the material witnesses have turned hostile, the fact remains that, the Trial Court has appreciated the evidence of remaining witnesses and rightly convicted the appellant. Therefore, the judgment is liable to be upheld.

Having heard the learned counsels for the respective parties and also perused the findings of the Trial Court, the Trial Court mainly relied on the evidence of P.W.1

7 -

NC: 2025:KHC:31129 CRL.A No. 1730 of 2024

HC-KAR

to 3. Though, P.W.1 to 3 has turned hostile and not supported the case of the prosecution, the Trial Court recorded the conviction which is not proper. The manner in which the Trial Court appreciated the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C would indicate that the Trial Court has failed to appreciate the case of the prosecution. In other words, the Trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence of the witnesses. Consequently the impugned judgment is passed which is liable to be set aside.

In the light of the observations made above, I

proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

i. The Criminal Appeal is allowed .

ii. The judgment of conviction dated 21.11.2022 and order on sentence dated 22.11.2022 passed in Spl.C.No.479/2021 on the file of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-I, Mysuru, is hereby, set aside.

iii. The accused is acquitted for the offences punishable under Section 376(2)()n), 506, 323 of I.P.C under

8 -

NC: 2025:KHC:31129 CRL.A No. 1730 of 2024

HC-KAR

Section 11(iii) read with Section 12, 5(l)(m) read with 6 of POCSO Act, 2012.

iv. The bail bonds executed if any, stands cancelled.

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

NM

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31